A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travelling Style » Air travel
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Amazing Race and airline codesharing



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 3rd, 2005, 05:47 AM
Edward Hasbrouck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Amazing Race and airline codesharing

This column with links:
http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000519.html

Complete index of columns on "The Amazing Race":
http://hasbrouck.org/amazingrace

[There have been some attacks on my Web site that have
intemittently rendered it inaccessible. I'm making some
changes to make it more reliable. I'm also re-posting
my last 2 columns on "The Amazing Race 6"; they
should also be available now on my Web site.]

======================================

The Amazing Race 7, Episode 1 (airline codesharing)

Long Beach, CA (USA) - Lima (Peru) - Ancon (Peru) -
Lima (Peru) - Cusco (Peru) - Huambutio (Peru) - Pisac (Peru) -
Cusco (Peru)

The Amazing Race began its seventh season with the
racers being required by the producers of the
reality-TV show -- at the behest, presumably, of
the airlines that have bought product placements
within the show along with their sponsorships -- to
take connecting flights from Los Angeles to Lima
via Miami or New York on USA-based airlines, rather
than the nonstop flight on LAN Chile, leaving at
about the same time, that would have gotten them to
Lima almost six hours earlier. That's exactly the
same LAX-Lima flight on LAN Chile that would have
been part of the fastest route for the contestants
in the first leg of The Amazing Race 5 a year ago.
Amazing indeed!

Even given a free choice, of course, it's often
difficult to figure out which airlines fly to where
you want to go, especially because so many airlines
put their code-share flight numbers on flights
actually operated by other airlines, in order to
pretend they fly to more places than they actually
do.

Codesharing is fraud. It gives no benefit to
travellers or consumers. Airlines lie about this,
but they've had "interline" agreements in place for
years that allow them to offer through fares,
through ticketing, through baggage checking, and
frequent flyer mileage credits between airlines
completely independently of which airlines' codes
are placed on the flight.

No actual airline service or benefit to travellers
is actually dependant to the slightest degree on
cadesharing. Codesharing is done for the sole
purpose of misleading consumers about which airline
operates the flight, which destinations the airline
"serves", how many flights they actually operate to
those places, and what services and amenities will
be available on those flights.

In a more complex way, by making a set of
connections appear to be on the same airline, when
it's actually between different airlines,
codesharing causes flights to be ranked higher in
the responses to flight availability requests
provided to travel agencies by Computerized
Reservation Systems -- misleading travellers
directly by distorting which connections are shown
first by travel agency Web sites, and misleading
travellers indirectly by misleading offline travel
agents who have no easy way, in any of the CRS's
I've used, to override the display
mis-prioritization of interline connections
fraudulaently labeled as online codeshare
connections.

Quite simply, Airline X puts its shared code on a
flight operated by Airline Y because it believes
that more people will buy tickets on that flight if
it is labelled as a flight by Airline X than if it
is truthfully labelled as a flight by Airline Y.
There's no "need" for that, no excuse for that, and
no reason for the DOT not to exercise its authority
to ban codesharing as a deceptive business
practice.

I've talked about this before in relation to
previous seasons of The Amazing Race and, more
importantly, the problems it causes for real-life
travellers. This time, however, there is something
you can do about it: the USA Department of
Transportation (DOT) is soliciting public comments
through 14 March 2005, for consideration in the
DOT's first major review in years of its rules for
codesharing.

Not surprisingly, there's a catch: the DOT is not
proposing to crack down on the deception of
codesharing, but to Do The Wrong Thing by reducing
the extent to which airlines have to disclose which
service labelled with the airline's flight number
is actually operated by other airlines.

That's an outrage, and deserves the strongest
public condemnation.

If you've ever gone to the wrong terminal to check
in, maybe even missed a flight, because it was
really operated from a different terminal by a
different airline; if you've ever had to change
terminals inconveniently while making connections
because your "online" connection between flights
"on the same airline" involved a codeshare flight
at a different terminal; if you've ever booked a
flight you thought would be on one airline, and
found yourself on a different one that you wouldn't
knowingly have chosen, or wouldn't have paid as
much for; if you've ever found yourself on a
codeshare flight that lacked the in-flight
amenities or service that the airline in whose name
you booked advertises that it offers on all its own
flights (but doesn't offer on flights with its
label that are actually operated by other airlines)
-- this is your chance to give the DOT an earful.

Read the new rules proposed by the DOT and the sleazy
and disingenuous arguments from United Airlines
(supported by American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, US
Airways, and Orbitz.com) on which they are based. If
it isn't obvious what's wrong with the DOT proposal,
see the argument against the proposal from Southwest
Airlines (self-interested but nonetheless accurate)
and my analysis of code-sharing and airline alliances.
The DOT Web site also includes the complete docket of
comments from airlines and the public:

DOT proposal:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf91/311330_web.pdf

United Airlines petition:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf89/295535_web.pdf

Southwest Airlines comments:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf90/299700_web.pdf

My analysis of codesharing:
http://hasbrouck.org/articles/alliances.html

Complete docket of comments to the DOT:
http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...umberValue=190
83&searchType=docket

By government standards, it's (relatively) easy to
submit your
comments:

1. Go to the comment submission Web page:
http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/dspSubmission.cfm

2. Enter "19083" in the "Docket ID" box.

3. Choose "OST" [Office of the Secretary of
Transportation] from the "Operating Administration"
pull-down menu.

4. Click either the "Enter a Comment" or "Attach a
File" box next to "Submission Method".

5. Fill in as much of your personal information as you
like. (Keep in mind that whatever you fill in will be
posted on the Web with your comment.)

6. Click "Continue". Depending on which option you
chose, you'll either get a box to type in your
comments (4000 characters maximum), or a page to
upload a file of comments of any length that you've
prepared on your own computer (in text, PDF, RTF,TIFF,
Wordperfect, or MS-Word format).

To be considered, your comments must be received by 5
p.m. Washington, DC, time on Monday, 14 March 2005.
I'll pattach my own comments to this article on my Web
site as soon as I've filed them.

----------------
Edward Hasbrouck

http://hasbrouck.org

"The Practical Nomad: How to Travel Around the World"
(3rd edition, 2004)
"The Practical Nomad Guide to the Online Travel Marketplace"
http://www.practicalnomad.com

  #2  
Old March 3rd, 2005, 03:14 PM
Mike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You make it sound like it is difficult to determine which flights are
codeshares. Anyone with computer skills equivalent to that of my 4-yr
old should be able to determine which flights are codeshares or not.
For the last several years when I have booked on flights that were
codeshares, the booking engine would always give me information
telling me that the flight was operated by a different carrier.



On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 04:47:55 -0000, Edward Hasbrouck
wrote:

This column with links:
http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000519.html

Complete index of columns on "The Amazing Race":
http://hasbrouck.org/amazingrace

[There have been some attacks on my Web site that have
intemittently rendered it inaccessible. I'm making some
changes to make it more reliable. I'm also re-posting
my last 2 columns on "The Amazing Race 6"; they
should also be available now on my Web site.]

======================================

The Amazing Race 7, Episode 1 (airline codesharing)

Long Beach, CA (USA) - Lima (Peru) - Ancon (Peru) -
Lima (Peru) - Cusco (Peru) - Huambutio (Peru) - Pisac (Peru) -
Cusco (Peru)

The Amazing Race began its seventh season with the
racers being required by the producers of the
reality-TV show -- at the behest, presumably, of
the airlines that have bought product placements
within the show along with their sponsorships -- to
take connecting flights from Los Angeles to Lima
via Miami or New York on USA-based airlines, rather
than the nonstop flight on LAN Chile, leaving at
about the same time, that would have gotten them to
Lima almost six hours earlier. That's exactly the
same LAX-Lima flight on LAN Chile that would have
been part of the fastest route for the contestants
in the first leg of The Amazing Race 5 a year ago.
Amazing indeed!

Even given a free choice, of course, it's often
difficult to figure out which airlines fly to where
you want to go, especially because so many airlines
put their code-share flight numbers on flights
actually operated by other airlines, in order to
pretend they fly to more places than they actually
do.

Codesharing is fraud. It gives no benefit to
travellers or consumers. Airlines lie about this,
but they've had "interline" agreements in place for
years that allow them to offer through fares,
through ticketing, through baggage checking, and
frequent flyer mileage credits between airlines
completely independently of which airlines' codes
are placed on the flight.

I disagree, codesharing can be of great benefit to travellers and
fraud is a pretty harsh word.. A year ago, I was scheduled on CO from
LGW-EWR-MCO. The LGW-EWR segment on CO was cancelled due to weather
in EWR. Because CO codeshares with VS, they were able to put me on
the CO coded VS operated LGW-MCO flight.

No actual airline service or benefit to travellers
is actually dependant to the slightest degree on
cadesharing. Codesharing is done for the sole
purpose of misleading consumers about which airline
operates the flight, which destinations the airline
"serves", how many flights they actually operate to
those places, and what services and amenities will
be available on those flights.

Wrong again. Last week I flew MCO-ATL-FCO-NAP on all DL coded flights
with the FCO-NAP segment operated by AZ. Since the flight had a DL
code rather than an AZ code, I was able to earn more miles for my DL
skymiles account. DL gives a 50% bonus for flights in Y fare and AZ
does not.

In a more complex way, by making a set of
connections appear to be on the same airline, when
it's actually between different airlines,
codesharing causes flights to be ranked higher in
the responses to flight availability requests
provided to travel agencies by Computerized
Reservation Systems -- misleading travellers
directly by distorting which connections are shown
first by travel agency Web sites, and misleading
travellers indirectly by misleading offline travel
agents who have no easy way, in any of the CRS's
I've used, to override the display
mis-prioritization of interline connections
fraudulaently labeled as online codeshare
connections.

If a TA cannot determine which flights are codeshares and is unable to
sort through which ones are and are not codeshares on a list of
available flights, then (s)he needs to find a different line of work.

Quite simply, Airline X puts its shared code on a
flight operated by Airline Y because it believes
that more people will buy tickets on that flight if
it is labelled as a flight by Airline X than if it
is truthfully labelled as a flight by Airline Y.
There's no "need" for that, no excuse for that, and
no reason for the DOT not to exercise its authority
to ban codesharing as a deceptive business
practice.

I find codeshares to be useful. I know if I fly DL to NAP that one
flight will be operated by AZ. However, if I have a problem, or need
to make a change, DL has "ownership" to the entire itinerary since
their code is on all of the flights in my reservation. Once I had an
itinerary MCO-ATL-FCO-NAP and the first 2 segments were DL coded &
operated and the last was AZ coded & operated. On the return, AZ went
on strike, DL was willing to change their 2 flights, but not the AZ
coded and operated flight. They instructed me to contact AZ to have
that flight changed. However, my colleague had the same flights with
all DL flight numbers, and DL was able to reaccomodate him with only
one call.

I've talked about this before in relation to
previous seasons of The Amazing Race and, more
importantly, the problems it causes for real-life
travellers. This time, however, there is something
you can do about it: the USA Department of
Transportation (DOT) is soliciting public comments
through 14 March 2005, for consideration in the
DOT's first major review in years of its rules for
codesharing.

Not surprisingly, there's a catch: the DOT is not
proposing to crack down on the deception of
codesharing, but to Do The Wrong Thing by reducing
the extent to which airlines have to disclose which
service labelled with the airline's flight number
is actually operated by other airlines.

That's an outrage, and deserves the strongest
public condemnation.

If you've ever gone to the wrong terminal to check
in, maybe even missed a flight, because it was
really operated from a different terminal by a
different airline; if you've ever had to change
terminals inconveniently while making connections
because your "online" connection between flights
"on the same airline" involved a codeshare flight
at a different terminal; if you've ever booked a
flight you thought would be on one airline, and
found yourself on a different one that you wouldn't
knowingly have chosen, or wouldn't have paid as
much for; if you've ever found yourself on a
codeshare flight that lacked the in-flight
amenities or service that the airline in whose name
you booked advertises that it offers on all its own
flights (but doesn't offer on flights with its
label that are actually operated by other airlines)
-- this is your chance to give the DOT an earful.


If you have ever had one of the above issues, then you did not
properly research your trip, or you have a terrible TA.

Read the new rules proposed by the DOT and the sleazy
and disingenuous arguments from United Airlines
(supported by American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, US
Airways, and Orbitz.com) on which they are based. If
it isn't obvious what's wrong with the DOT proposal,
see the argument against the proposal from Southwest
Airlines (self-interested but nonetheless accurate)
and my analysis of code-sharing and airline alliances.
The DOT Web site also includes the complete docket of
comments from airlines and the public:

DOT proposal:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf91/311330_web.pdf

United Airlines petition:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf89/295535_web.pdf

Southwest Airlines comments:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf90/299700_web.pdf

My analysis of codesharing:
http://hasbrouck.org/articles/alliances.html

Complete docket of comments to the DOT:
http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...umberValue=190
83&searchType=docket

By government standards, it's (relatively) easy to
submit your
comments:

1. Go to the comment submission Web page:
http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/dspSubmission.cfm

2. Enter "19083" in the "Docket ID" box.

3. Choose "OST" [Office of the Secretary of
Transportation] from the "Operating Administration"
pull-down menu.

4. Click either the "Enter a Comment" or "Attach a
File" box next to "Submission Method".

5. Fill in as much of your personal information as you
like. (Keep in mind that whatever you fill in will be
posted on the Web with your comment.)

6. Click "Continue". Depending on which option you
chose, you'll either get a box to type in your
comments (4000 characters maximum), or a page to
upload a file of comments of any length that you've
prepared on your own computer (in text, PDF, RTF,TIFF,
Wordperfect, or MS-Word format).

To be considered, your comments must be received by 5
p.m. Washington, DC, time on Monday, 14 March 2005.
I'll pattach my own comments to this article on my Web
site as soon as I've filed them.

----------------
Edward Hasbrouck

http://hasbrouck.org

"The Practical Nomad: How to Travel Around the World"
(3rd edition, 2004)
"The Practical Nomad Guide to the Online Travel Marketplace"
http://www.practicalnomad.com


  #3  
Old March 3rd, 2005, 06:29 PM
Jeff Hacker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mike" wrote in message
...
You make it sound like it is difficult to determine which flights are
codeshares. Anyone with computer skills equivalent to that of my 4-yr
old should be able to determine which flights are codeshares or not.
For the last several years when I have booked on flights that were
codeshares, the booking engine would always give me information
telling me that the flight was operated by a different carrier.



On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 04:47:55 -0000, Edward Hasbrouck
wrote:

This column with links:
http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/000519.html

Complete index of columns on "The Amazing Race":
http://hasbrouck.org/amazingrace

[There have been some attacks on my Web site that have
intemittently rendered it inaccessible. I'm making some
changes to make it more reliable. I'm also re-posting
my last 2 columns on "The Amazing Race 6"; they
should also be available now on my Web site.]

======================================

The Amazing Race 7, Episode 1 (airline codesharing)

Long Beach, CA (USA) - Lima (Peru) - Ancon (Peru) -
Lima (Peru) - Cusco (Peru) - Huambutio (Peru) - Pisac (Peru) -
Cusco (Peru)

The Amazing Race began its seventh season with the
racers being required by the producers of the
reality-TV show -- at the behest, presumably, of
the airlines that have bought product placements
within the show along with their sponsorships -- to
take connecting flights from Los Angeles to Lima
via Miami or New York on USA-based airlines, rather
than the nonstop flight on LAN Chile, leaving at
about the same time, that would have gotten them to
Lima almost six hours earlier. That's exactly the
same LAX-Lima flight on LAN Chile that would have
been part of the fastest route for the contestants
in the first leg of The Amazing Race 5 a year ago.
Amazing indeed!

Even given a free choice, of course, it's often
difficult to figure out which airlines fly to where
you want to go, especially because so many airlines
put their code-share flight numbers on flights
actually operated by other airlines, in order to
pretend they fly to more places than they actually
do.

Codesharing is fraud. It gives no benefit to
travellers or consumers. Airlines lie about this,
but they've had "interline" agreements in place for
years that allow them to offer through fares,
through ticketing, through baggage checking, and
frequent flyer mileage credits between airlines
completely independently of which airlines' codes
are placed on the flight.

I disagree, codesharing can be of great benefit to travellers and
fraud is a pretty harsh word.. A year ago, I was scheduled on CO from
LGW-EWR-MCO. The LGW-EWR segment on CO was cancelled due to weather
in EWR. Because CO codeshares with VS, they were able to put me on
the CO coded VS operated LGW-MCO flight.


They could have done this even without the code-sharing arrangement. CO and
VS have interline agreements by which VS will honor a CO ticket (and v.v.)
even without the codesharing agreement.

No actual airline service or benefit to travellers
is actually dependant to the slightest degree on
cadesharing. Codesharing is done for the sole
purpose of misleading consumers about which airline
operates the flight, which destinations the airline
"serves", how many flights they actually operate to
those places, and what services and amenities will
be available on those flights.

Wrong again. Last week I flew MCO-ATL-FCO-NAP on all DL coded flights
with the FCO-NAP segment operated by AZ. Since the flight had a DL
code rather than an AZ code, I was able to earn more miles for my DL
skymiles account. DL gives a 50% bonus for flights in Y fare and AZ
does not.


That's a function of the frequent flyer tie-in between DL and AZ rather than
anything else. I can get Northwest miles with my Delta or Continental
frequent flyer membership, and get the bonus miles too, whether or not the
flight is a code share.

In a more complex way, by making a set of
connections appear to be on the same airline, when
it's actually between different airlines,
codesharing causes flights to be ranked higher in
the responses to flight availability requests
provided to travel agencies by Computerized
Reservation Systems -- misleading travellers
directly by distorting which connections are shown
first by travel agency Web sites, and misleading
travellers indirectly by misleading offline travel
agents who have no easy way, in any of the CRS's
I've used, to override the display
mis-prioritization of interline connections
fraudulaently labeled as online codeshare
connections.

If a TA cannot determine which flights are codeshares and is unable to
sort through which ones are and are not codeshares on a list of
available flights, then (s)he needs to find a different line of work.


With this, I agree with you. It quite simply is very easy to see a flight
is operated by a code-share partner, and there are several ways to do so
(flight numbers being the main one).

Quite simply, Airline X puts its shared code on a
flight operated by Airline Y because it believes
that more people will buy tickets on that flight if
it is labelled as a flight by Airline X than if it
is truthfully labelled as a flight by Airline Y.
There's no "need" for that, no excuse for that, and
no reason for the DOT not to exercise its authority
to ban codesharing as a deceptive business
practice.

I find codeshares to be useful. I know if I fly DL to NAP that one
flight will be operated by AZ. However, if I have a problem, or need
to make a change, DL has "ownership" to the entire itinerary since
their code is on all of the flights in my reservation. Once I had an
itinerary MCO-ATL-FCO-NAP and the first 2 segments were DL coded &
operated and the last was AZ coded & operated. On the return, AZ went
on strike, DL was willing to change their 2 flights, but not the AZ
coded and operated flight. They instructed me to contact AZ to have
that flight changed. However, my colleague had the same flights with
all DL flight numbers, and DL was able to reaccomodate him with only
one call.

I've talked about this before in relation to
previous seasons of The Amazing Race and, more
importantly, the problems it causes for real-life
travellers. This time, however, there is something
you can do about it: the USA Department of
Transportation (DOT) is soliciting public comments
through 14 March 2005, for consideration in the
DOT's first major review in years of its rules for
codesharing.

Not surprisingly, there's a catch: the DOT is not
proposing to crack down on the deception of
codesharing, but to Do The Wrong Thing by reducing
the extent to which airlines have to disclose which
service labelled with the airline's flight number
is actually operated by other airlines.

That's an outrage, and deserves the strongest
public condemnation.

If you've ever gone to the wrong terminal to check
in, maybe even missed a flight, because it was
really operated from a different terminal by a
different airline; if you've ever had to change
terminals inconveniently while making connections
because your "online" connection between flights
"on the same airline" involved a codeshare flight
at a different terminal; if you've ever booked a
flight you thought would be on one airline, and
found yourself on a different one that you wouldn't
knowingly have chosen, or wouldn't have paid as
much for; if you've ever found yourself on a
codeshare flight that lacked the in-flight
amenities or service that the airline in whose name
you booked advertises that it offers on all its own
flights (but doesn't offer on flights with its
label that are actually operated by other airlines)
-- this is your chance to give the DOT an earful.


If you have ever had one of the above issues, then you did not
properly research your trip, or you have a terrible TA.

Read the new rules proposed by the DOT and the sleazy
and disingenuous arguments from United Airlines
(supported by American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, US
Airways, and Orbitz.com) on which they are based. If
it isn't obvious what's wrong with the DOT proposal,
see the argument against the proposal from Southwest
Airlines (self-interested but nonetheless accurate)
and my analysis of code-sharing and airline alliances.
The DOT Web site also includes the complete docket of
comments from airlines and the public:

DOT proposal:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf91/311330_web.pdf

United Airlines petition:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf89/295535_web.pdf

Southwest Airlines comments:
http://dmses.dot.gov/docimages/pdf90/299700_web.pdf

My analysis of codesharing:
http://hasbrouck.org/articles/alliances.html

Complete docket of comments to the DOT:
http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchResu...umberValue=190
83&searchType=docket

By government standards, it's (relatively) easy to
submit your
comments:

1. Go to the comment submission Web page:
http://dmses.dot.gov/submit/dspSubmission.cfm

2. Enter "19083" in the "Docket ID" box.

3. Choose "OST" [Office of the Secretary of
Transportation] from the "Operating Administration"
pull-down menu.

4. Click either the "Enter a Comment" or "Attach a
File" box next to "Submission Method".

5. Fill in as much of your personal information as you
like. (Keep in mind that whatever you fill in will be
posted on the Web with your comment.)

6. Click "Continue". Depending on which option you
chose, you'll either get a box to type in your
comments (4000 characters maximum), or a page to
upload a file of comments of any length that you've
prepared on your own computer (in text, PDF, RTF,TIFF,
Wordperfect, or MS-Word format).

To be considered, your comments must be received by 5
p.m. Washington, DC, time on Monday, 14 March 2005.
I'll pattach my own comments to this article on my Web
site as soon as I've filed them.

----------------
Edward Hasbrouck

http://hasbrouck.org

"The Practical Nomad: How to Travel Around the World"
(3rd edition, 2004)
"The Practical Nomad Guide to the Online Travel Marketplace"
http://www.practicalnomad.com




  #4  
Old March 3rd, 2005, 07:28 PM
Mike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

---snip---
Codesharing is fraud. It gives no benefit to
travellers or consumers. Airlines lie about this,
but they've had "interline" agreements in place for
years that allow them to offer through fares,
through ticketing, through baggage checking, and
frequent flyer mileage credits between airlines
completely independently of which airlines' codes
are placed on the flight.

I disagree, codesharing can be of great benefit to travellers and
fraud is a pretty harsh word.. A year ago, I was scheduled on CO from
LGW-EWR-MCO. The LGW-EWR segment on CO was cancelled due to weather
in EWR. Because CO codeshares with VS, they were able to put me on
the CO coded VS operated LGW-MCO flight.


They could have done this even without the code-sharing arrangement. CO and
VS have interline agreements by which VS will honor a CO ticket (and v.v.)
even without the codesharing agreement.


This may be true. However, the CO check-in agent was not the sharpest
tool in the shed, and I had to suggest to her to put us on the MCO-LGW
flight. She originally suggested LGW-IAH-MCO for me. However, since
I saw "VS 027/CO 8247" at the Virgin check-in counter and knew about
CO and VS codesharing, I knew I had a better option. If they only had
the interline agreement and no codeshares, it would not have been as
obvious that I could have taken the VS flight. Ironically, the agent
commented that my suggestion was great, and she hadn't thought of
that.


No actual airline service or benefit to travellers
is actually dependant to the slightest degree on
cadesharing. Codesharing is done for the sole
purpose of misleading consumers about which airline
operates the flight, which destinations the airline
"serves", how many flights they actually operate to
those places, and what services and amenities will
be available on those flights.

Wrong again. Last week I flew MCO-ATL-FCO-NAP on all DL coded flights
with the FCO-NAP segment operated by AZ. Since the flight had a DL
code rather than an AZ code, I was able to earn more miles for my DL
skymiles account. DL gives a 50% bonus for flights in Y fare and AZ
does not.


That's a function of the frequent flyer tie-in between DL and AZ rather than
anything else. I can get Northwest miles with my Delta or Continental
frequent flyer membership, and get the bonus miles too, whether or not the
flight is a code share.


Yes and no. I can certainly earn DL miles on DL and any of their
partners. However, DL gives a 50% class of service mileage bonus when
booked in coach classes Y, B, and M of a DL coded flight. Refer to
http://www.delta.com/skymiles/getmil...iles/index.jsp and
http://www.delta.com/skymiles/getmil...ners/index.jsp My
ticket was a Y fare with all DL flight numbers. I could have paid the
same for the ticket and had the AZ segment, with an AZ flight number,
and still earned DL miles. However, I would not have gotten the 50%
mileage bonus for the AZ flights. While in this case it was only a
250 mile difference, I have been in on a Y fare on AZ metal with a DL
flight number from MIA-MXP. In that case, I would have lost out on
almost 2500 miles.

The point that I am making with that example is that the codeshare in
that case benefits me despite what the OP thinks.

Also, you cannot get NW miles with DL or CO FF membership. I think
you meant you can earn NW miles when flying NW, CO and DL (among
others). Any Worldperks bonus you get is per NW rules.
---snip---
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Amazing Race 5, Episode 1 Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 2 July 13th, 2004 01:04 PM
Safety board wants airline passengers weighed Jean C Air travel 49 March 15th, 2004 09:31 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.